re: #696 Charles

It’s also interesting to look at who dissented from those reversals — in almost all cases, the dissenters were the liberal justices. Which strongly suggests that the reversals were politically motivated. The Health Insurance case is the only one in which the dissenters included conservative justices, which suggests that it was NOT reversed, as the first citation says. The second (more detailed) description which says it was not reversed is probably the correct one.

Point made. Doesn’t change my mind. But the real scary part of your comment is “Which strongly suggests that the reversals were politically motivated.” Am I missing something, or is politics supposed to be left at the courtroom door?